4 ms·

Python 3.0 came out in 2008, python 2.7 was supposed to reach end of life in 2015, it was extended until 2020. It's now 2022. That's all the justification the

Python 3.0 came out in 2008, python 2.7 was supposed to reach end of life in 2015, it was extended until 2020. It's now 2022. That's all the justification they need.

makecheck 5y ago
In a way, sure; but shouldn’t this have been a “macOS 11.0” or “macOS 12.0” change? Slipping it into some minor update that many users will install without a second thought is not a reasonable thing. It could break software that people use, not realizing they depend on Python to use it.
- _aavaa_ 5y ago
  I can see the argument. But I still think it's shifting the blame from the developers of this software that people use but which haven't bothered updating in over a decade. EDIT: For the past, I don't know how many versions of macOS, you'd get the following message when running python2: "WARNING: Python 2.7 is not recommended. This version is included in macOS for compatibility with legacy software. Future versions of macOS will not include Python 2.7."
  - upbeat_general 5y ago
    True, except that's only been since catalina which is from 2019. While I get that programs can't practically run on a new OS decades later, I don't think we should be okay with such a short lifespan as on macOS.
    - _aavaa_ 5y ago
      But it isn't a short lifespan. Python 2 had it's original EOL in 2015. It's been 7 years since the date of the original EOL. Which is to say nothing about how much heads up they had before 2015.
- sam_bristow 5y ago
  Didn't Apple completely remove Java in 10.8 (Lion) which wasnt a major version number bump either? I don't use MacOS, but others have mentioned it's been printing deprecation warnings for quite a while now.
  - makecheck 5y ago
    In the days when it was OS 10.8, 10.9, etc. those were major versions, updated over a year and a half apart. Apple may call it “12.3” now but it is still released every few weeks or months, with just as much randomness as 10.8.3 would have been.
waste_monk 5y ago
I find it amazing the lengths python 2 loyalists take to keep using it, and the ferocity when it was EOL'd (the second time). I wonder how many people are still actively using it (not counting situations such as when OS ships with Python2 and upgrading will break important utilities)?
- upbeat_general 5y ago
  Trust me I have no interest in using python 2. My issue is exactly what you stated: breaking lots of programs that relied on it being there. The fact that it's being removed in a minor update is even worse.
  - toastal 5y ago
    Yup. Photographers and the like are being slowly brickwalled by DisplayCAL (UI for colord, ArgyllCMS, used for many thing like cross-platform measuring/calibrating monitors) in an unmaintained by usable state being removed from package repos everywhere because of Python 2.7 removal.
- fivea 5y ago
  > I find it amazing the lengths python 2 loyalists take to keep using it You don't need to spin issues that can be purely technical in terms of personal traits like stubbornness. Just keep in mind that software doesn't change itself, and if you have a python27 script written yesterday then it won't be magically ported to python37 during the night. Unless people do the work, that won't change. Given there are far more people using software than writing it, then I don't understand what leads you to believe that software is perpetually maintained and ported to newer releases.
  - waste_monk 5y ago
    Python 2 was originally going to be EOL'd in 2015, the announcement for which was in 2008. Only later was the EOL pushed back to 2020. So while it's only been officially "dead" for two years now, the writing had been on the wall for 12 years before that. At this point it is stubbornness - I know software doesn't magically get ported and updated as time goes on, but I also acknowledge that if no one cares to update the software (or provide a replacement) in a 14-year window then that is on that package's community rather than everyone else. The baseline should not be dragged down to accommodate legacy software. MacOS removing Python 2 support in a minor OS version bump was the wrong way of handling things, but in general you should not expect it to be available on modern platforms or be surprised at its removal (outside of pledged long-term support e.g. CentOS). And you can still use a VM or something, same as you would use DosBox to run old 16-bit software.

Python 3.0 came out in 2008, python 2.7 was supposed to reach end of life in 2015, it was extended until 2020. It's now 2022. That's all the justification they need.

makecheck 5y ago

In a way, sure; but shouldn’t this have been a “macOS 11.0” or “macOS 12.0” change? Slipping it into some minor update that many users will install without a second thought is not a reasonable thing. It could break software that people use, not realizing they depend on Python to use it.

_aavaa_ 5y ago
I can see the argument. But I still think it's shifting the blame from the developers of this software that people use but which haven't bothered updating in over a decade. EDIT: For the past, I don't know how many versions of macOS, you'd get the following message when running python2: "WARNING: Python 2.7 is not recommended. This version is included in macOS for compatibility with legacy software. Future versions of macOS will not include Python 2.7."
- upbeat_general 5y ago
  True, except that's only been since catalina which is from 2019. While I get that programs can't practically run on a new OS decades later, I don't think we should be okay with such a short lifespan as on macOS.
  - _aavaa_ 5y ago
    But it isn't a short lifespan. Python 2 had it's original EOL in 2015. It's been 7 years since the date of the original EOL. Which is to say nothing about how much heads up they had before 2015.
sam_bristow 5y ago
Didn't Apple completely remove Java in 10.8 (Lion) which wasnt a major version number bump either? I don't use MacOS, but others have mentioned it's been printing deprecation warnings for quite a while now.
- makecheck 5y ago
  In the days when it was OS 10.8, 10.9, etc. those were major versions, updated over a year and a half apart. Apple may call it “12.3” now but it is still released every few weeks or months, with just as much randomness as 10.8.3 would have been.

waste_monk 5y ago

I find it amazing the lengths python 2 loyalists take to keep using it, and the ferocity when it was EOL'd (the second time). I wonder how many people are still actively using it (not counting situations such as when OS ships with Python2 and upgrading will break important utilities)?

upbeat_general 5y ago
Trust me I have no interest in using python 2. My issue is exactly what you stated: breaking lots of programs that relied on it being there. The fact that it's being removed in a minor update is even worse.
- toastal 5y ago
  Yup. Photographers and the like are being slowly brickwalled by DisplayCAL (UI for colord, ArgyllCMS, used for many thing like cross-platform measuring/calibrating monitors) in an unmaintained by usable state being removed from package repos everywhere because of Python 2.7 removal.
fivea 5y ago
> I find it amazing the lengths python 2 loyalists take to keep using it You don't need to spin issues that can be purely technical in terms of personal traits like stubbornness. Just keep in mind that software doesn't change itself, and if you have a python27 script written yesterday then it won't be magically ported to python37 during the night. Unless people do the work, that won't change. Given there are far more people using software than writing it, then I don't understand what leads you to believe that software is perpetually maintained and ported to newer releases.
- waste_monk 5y ago
  Python 2 was originally going to be EOL'd in 2015, the announcement for which was in 2008. Only later was the EOL pushed back to 2020. So while it's only been officially "dead" for two years now, the writing had been on the wall for 12 years before that. At this point it is stubbornness - I know software doesn't magically get ported and updated as time goes on, but I also acknowledge that if no one cares to update the software (or provide a replacement) in a 14-year window then that is on that package's community rather than everyone else. The baseline should not be dragged down to accommodate legacy software. MacOS removing Python 2 support in a minor OS version bump was the wrong way of handling things, but in general you should not expect it to be available on modern platforms or be surprised at its removal (outside of pledged long-term support e.g. CentOS). And you can still use a VM or something, same as you would use DosBox to run old 16-bit software.